More Larry Nonsense

Baen author Larry Correia is currently banned from Facebook for bullying[1] but has back-up account for his fan page on the lesser-known social media service MeWe. I thought readers would be interested to know about a new project he is working on. Not sure what you’d call it? Muck raking? Quixotic quest for revenge? Doing his utmost to make a bad situation worse for fun and profit? Not sure.

“I have a favor to ask (and if one of the mods could put this in the Facebook group too, that would be great). This is directly related to Toni getting kicked out of WorldCon.
This is for a project someone is working on. I don’t know how it will proceed yet.
I need examples of writers/editors/fans who WorldCon is perfectly comfortable with, and their shitty posts, tweets, memes, of things that aren’t “inclusive”. (advocating violence, shooting cops, killing Trump, celebrating Rush’s death, putting us in reeducation camps, whatever. If it makes you feel not included, I’d like to know)
If you don’t have a screen cap but are going from memory, that’s fine. (that standard of evidence is perfectly acceptable for the “exposes” they utilize)
I know this is “political”. I know this may make some of you here uncomfortable, which is why I don’t want debate or infighting, just gathering evidence. This isn’t about right or left, this is about cancel culture being fucking evil, and people needing to stand up to it. If you don’t like it, keep on scrolling. Not up for debate.
Post them in the comments if you’ve got them.”

Monster Hunter Nation MeWe group, Saturday, February 20, 2021 12:54 pm GMT+11 [2]

What is interesting from the comments is…well there’s nothing interesting in the comments. I think he imagined there would be all of these great examples of famous authors saying terrible things but people didn’t have much. I’m surprised they haven’t found more.

You will all note the rhetorical sleight of hand at the start. Toni Weiskopff has not been kicked out of Worldcon. She’s no longer Guest of Honour, not banned from attending. Of course, that would make Larry’s project even harder if he had to find a Guest of Honour with dubious comments that had been brought to Worldcon’s attention and then they didn’t disinvite them?


98 thoughts on “More Larry Nonsense

      1. Larry needs to discover the block button, but for some reason he likes to fight. There were people who came on his facebook page to argue with him over politics and he would make facebook posts going “I have a live one”. Anyone with sense would just block them and get back to your life. Why fight? Even if I am on the same side of an issue with someone going on someone else’s social media just to argue is stupid.

        Liked by 1 person

  1. I am also a bit suprised that they haven’t found more that was out of context or by someone that is an unknown. And I do think there are cases of writers behaving badly, but I am not suprised that (except perhaps cellebrating somones dead) Larrys example were nothing.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. If “you are going from memory, that’s fine.” That sets the scene for the usual puppy-type accusations, where weeping, rich, white men wail about their enemies threatening to pack them into cattle cars and send them off to left wing FEMA death camps (now that confirmed Marxist-Leninist “Aderall-free” Joe Biden is president, I assume fantasizing about FEMA death camps is back in vogue).

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Mayor Pete’s husband had the best reaction to Rush’s death. He didn’t say anything. He just put up a photo. Which was a subtweet AND the most glorious shade that could possibly be thrown. Look it up.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. I’ve always quite liked Clarence Darrow’s quip, in which he carefully preserved civility by not citing any specific recently deceased person, but instead made an observation of entirely general scope, in his 1932 memoir:

      “I have never killed any one, but I have read some obituary notices with great satisfaction.”

      Liked by 3 people

    3. I’m not a fan of publicly cheering about the deaths even of truly awful people, but considering that Rush Limbaugh repeatedly cheered about the deaths of people he disliked, including AIDS victims whose only crime was being gay, I fully understand people who do cheer about his death.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I am also not fan of cheering about the deads of people, but it is a very false aquivalent from Larry. If we take this as a messurment than wow would we have to ban a lot of people.

        Liked by 1 person

    1. I was thinking about all of the reeducation that could be helpful.

        • Remedial Logic
        • Remedial Epistemology
        • Remedial Ethics
        • Remedial Manners!

      But they’re so bad at thinking that I doubt they’d learn. Who would be able to teach them, when they’d be sticking their fingers in their ears and going “Lalalalalalalaaaaaa FAKE NEWS!” for all the classes the whole time?

      Liked by 2 people

  3. It says something that Larry is so bereft of research skills he needs to crowdsource this. Examples of bad behavior in the sff community aren’t hard to come by. I’m convinced Harlan Ellison’s recitation of fannish awfulness, “Xenogenesis,” was written off the top of his head. It originated as his 1984 Westercon GoH speech. The Internet Archive has a copy in the transcript of an Asimov’s issue — https://archive.org/stream/Asimovs_v14n08_1990-08/Asimovs_v14n08_1990-08_djvu.txt

    Liked by 3 people

    1. I haven’t read that since it originally appeared in Asimov’s, but isn’t that all about fans behaving badly towards authors? That’s a can of worms Larry isn’t going to want to open, although I’m sure his own comments section would be an inexhaustible resource.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. It’s a wildly overwrought article. While some of the behavior is extremely rude and sometimes creepy, “some fans are jerks” wasn’t enough for Ellison so he throws in predictions that some deranged fan will shoot him, and insists that since SF authors are awesome, it just doesn’t make sense fans wouldn’t be nice to them.
        It mostly confirmed my impression that Ellison never noticed he’d gone from an angry young man speaking truth to power to a crotchety old fart.

        Liked by 2 people

    2. I also think that harvesting stuff written 30 years ago buy an author who has been dead for more than 2 years now is going to have the sort of impact Larry is looking for.

      On the other hand, I have seen some Baen-stans yelling that Worldcon need to ban Marion Zimmer Bradley, and they have been undeterred by the point that she has been dead for 22 years now and probably isn’t going to be attending any Worldcons any time in the future.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I remember that worldcon doesn’t ban people if they aren’t attending members and like in the Hugos, they will not talk about theoretical isues.
        (I don’t know if there ever was a case of dening someone the posibility of beeing a suporting member)
        I remember this came up before with a certain person, that as far as I know was never a member of a worldcon.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Aw HELL no. Let her come as long as she’s paid her membership.

        If MZB can return as a zombie, she’d be the hit of the con! Just keep her away from braaiiins.

        The members could forever more wear ribbons that state “I MET ZOMBIE MZB”.

        Like

    3. “Harlan’ was my first thought but then I thought of a better source! There’s a whole bunch of authors who Worldcon deemed Hugo finalists, I think in 2015 or there abouts, and a couple of Astounding Award finalists who have said much worse things than you find on Baen’s Bar…Brad somebody?

      Liked by 8 people

      1. There was also that time noted crank Lou Antonelli had an inept attempt at swatting Gerrold at Sasquan and, despite literally trying to endanger someone’s life, was still allowed to attend.

        Liked by 2 people

  4. Oh, Larry, Larry, Larry…you just love bringing the fuel can to the raging fire, don’t you? And the worst part is that you can’t even understand that makes you a bad person.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Larry started out reprehensible and is getting more reprehensible by the day. Currently he’s just a festering, open boil upon the body fandom.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Isn’t that cute. He doesn’t know what “inclusive” means. (Or is pretending not to know.) It means including those who have regularly been excluded and discriminated against in society — the marginalized. Rush Limbaugh was not marginalized. He was an open white supremacist and homophobe who celebrated gay people’s deaths from AIDS. And our society rewards those people at the expense of BIPOC, white women, queer folk, the disabled, etc.

    Folks like Larry try to pretend that prejudice and discrimination are only about individuals doing mean words and acts, rather than entire systems of discrimination and dominant individuals in power demanding the right to control or violate marginalized people’s civil rights through laws, cops and prisons. If someone who presents themselves as progressive says something angry or hurtful to someone else, therefore all progressivism is bad, they argue. If a black person celebrates the death of a white supremacist who spent his career encouraging discrimination against black people and calling them lazy for bucks, then all black people don’t deserve equal civil rights, they argue, etc. At the same time, whatever “mean” words they use, like throw black people out of helicopters for seeking justice reform, don’t count or are dismissed if you can “find” a mean or angry thing said by a marginalized person. It’s just a sports game of trash talking to them, rather than people who have dominant positions in society due to prejudice controlling spaces, intimidating those marginalized and disadvantaged in society and trying to keep them quiet.

    Inclusion is about getting rid of a bigoted hierarchical society and of the enforced silence about it, something Larry and his political pals are ideologically against. Collecting angry statements from marginalized authors who are unhappy they are unfairly marginalized in society and in the SFF publishing industry only proves that those marginalized authors are not included, are discriminated against and at their frustration limit with that happening. English language SFF publishing is still nearly 90% white authors because of bigoted prejudice from an industry that is also staffed 90% by white people. Marginalized people are allowed to be angry about that. Larry thinks they shouldn’t be — that they should be scared to speak up about it. Conventions have traditionally been abusive towards marginalized people and kept marginalized authors from being able to work conventions as equal professionals with equal opportunity because of it. The marginalized authors have been excluded from conventions and opportunities. They are allowed to be angry about that and demand that conventions adopt policies to change and end that discrimination. Larry thinks they shouldn’t be — that they should be silenced while those who angrily demand that their marginalization continue should be the ones to speak.

    Larry will never admit that the discriminatory and intimidation speech on the Baen forums contributes to harming and excluding marginalized people in society or SFF because the whole right wing narrative is that they are the good and superior righteous the marginalized don’t have the right to question or oppose. Larry will never admit that Weisskopf’s support for letting that discriminatory speech continue on her company’s platform harms and excludes marginalized authors and fans attending the convention at which she was to be the guest of honor because for them, if you espouse exclusion, you should be the ones who get to speak and keep excluding and terrorizing the marginalized. Collecting the angry words of the marginalized doesn’t prove that they aren’t kept excluded, silenced and with less power and opportunity in society or the field. It proves they are. He’s just starting up another harassment campaign, a justification for the marginalized continuing not to have opportunities or a say in how they are treated and excluded.

    Larry is proving the point of the term inclusion by pretending it’s a neutral term instead of about societal systems of power. And he’s flexing the power of the dominant over the marginalized by trying to threaten them further. The convention deciding to stick to their code of conduct of inclusion of the marginalized by disinviting Weisskopf — who is supporting violent suppression of the marginalized — means the marginalized are making headway and Larry thinks he can change that by proving that the marginalized are bad, bad, bad. But the whole schtick of those in dominant groups invested in making sure inclusion doesn’t happen has always been to call the marginalized bad, bad, bad and thus not worthy of inclusion and equal opportunity and civil rights. He’s just pursuing bigotry and doing it by declaring that anger expressed at bigots who discriminate is a bad thing, equal to exclusion and violent threats against the marginalized. But it’s not. Weisskopf wasn’t disinvited because she’s a woman. She wasn’t even disinvited because she’s conservative. She was disinvited because she chose to support and allow discriminatory and violent hate speech against the marginalized on her company website. She chose bigotry and that stands, whether they want to admit it’s bigotry or not.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Folks like Larry try to pretend that prejudice and discrimination are only..
      ….when white people are held to account for their acts of prejudice and discrimination.

      Liked by 6 people

  6. Larry needs to limit his request for “evidence” against Worldcon to recent Worldcon Guests of Honor.

    Because that’s the issue here: DisCon III hasn’t forbidden Weisskopf from attending, despite her condoning the existence of violent murder and insurrection posts on her company’s forum. They’ve just chosen not to honor her. So if Larry wants to play tit-for-tat he needs to find examples of GoHs who have condoned similar sorts of things — and not examples from 30 years ago, either.

    But of course that’s why he’s portraying this as a general issue of inclusion, because something that was actually germane to the current situation wouldn’t give him anything to post about.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Lots of right-wingers go for examples way older than 30 years. A former friend of mine would bring up Woodrow Wilson’s racism as proof the left is bigoted. Or there are the people who point out Lincoln was a Republican.
      Current behavior by Republican Party? They don’t seem to find this relevant. It’s almost like they’re cherry-picking evidence.

      Liked by 4 people

    2. Well I would be okay, if Larry finds somethink of People behaving badly that
      a) is acurate, so not only taken out of context
      b) has any relation to the current worldcon
      c) a real isue.

      If their is a danger it would be good to know. I will freely admit, that I don’t think we will get anythink like this from Larry.

      Liked by 2 people

  7. Larry is, like all members of the Trumpist Party, completely unhinged from from anything that Impinges upon reality. I’m firmly convinced that they believe the fictions they tell about us in the same way that Larry believes there’s actually something tangible existing called Worldcon that acts to in a coherent manner to do Evil Things against them and the authors they like. (Hint: each Worldcon organisation is closer to a herd of cats.)

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Yeah. The fact that the current Worldcon Convention Committee acted so quickly indicates that there must have been an unusual amount of consensus about dis-inviting TW. Once she refused to disavow speech advocating political violence, the main delay was probably agreeing on the details of the press release. (Which by the way, was pretty much a miracle of no false equivalence or weasel words. Concom was pissed.)

      Liked by 4 people

      1. I’m pretty sure that there was at least one conversation between DisCon III and Weisskopf, and that she made it clear she had no intention of condemning the horrible speech on her company’s forum. She had a choice to make, and her public statement made it clear that she had chosen to pander to the Barfly crowd. She didn’t even have the grace to ask people to stop harassing Sanford, or to say that the harassment was wrong.

        She didn’t give DisCon III any choice but to do what they did. I don’t for a minute think that if DisCon III had waited a few days to see what Weisskopf did that the outcome would have been any different.

        Liked by 4 people

      2. Indeed a Worldcon committee isn’t the most speedy of beasts at the best of times, so I was very impressed they acted this fast. I think, and I am only speculating, that they really didn’t think that there was a whole lot she could do to Baen’s Bar short of emasculating it that would correct the problem that existed, so drawing out the process wasn’t going to help.

        It doesn’t help that Larry et al don’t understand what Worldcon is. They act like it is some uber organisation that controls fandom when it really isn’t. It certainly is a community of interest for a lot of us, but there’s a lot more genre fans who never, ever take part in the Worldcon community.

        Liked by 4 people

      3. I’m pretty sure that there are things that Toni Weisskopf could have done that would have been sufficient. If the problems were almost entirely restricted to two sub forums – neither related to the business – as defenders tell us, then closing those down and removing their content would have done most of what was wanted. But from her statement we can see that she wasn’t going to do any of it.

        What I think happened is that DisCon asked her to do something about the worst excesses and she refused point blank.

        Liked by 2 people

      4. As I keep pointing out, at least one contentious subforum is more or less business related, and moreover has its control delegated: the KratsKeller, the forum of our favourite faiLtC Kratman. Closing down the hate forums means taking away a perk Baen specifically extends to their authors, their own forum.

        1. That’s not something that’s good for author/publisher relationships.
        2. It would whip up a major frenzy against her.

        Liked by 1 person

      5. For some reason the defenders of the Bar don’t mention that forum as a problem.

        But if it was it could still have been shut down on a temporary basis and cleaned up. The denizens might object but that’s because they are the problem.

        Like

      6. Of course they don’t acknowledge the KratsKeller as part of the problem. That would mean admitting that the rot goes all the way to the Baen stable of authors (and thus to Toni, who is in the end the only one who can shutdown those forums), instead of “just a few rando’s in Politics and Blazes”.

        Liked by 1 person

      7. They act like it is some uber organisation that controls fandom when it really isn’t.

        They are also really mad that this organization is run by people they consider their inferiors. If you look through the Pup’s writings (especially Larry’s) there is a definite theme that there is a hierarchy of importance they expect to exist: Authors and editors are at the top, and then fans are below them.

        The fact that Worldcon is run by fans, and the members expect to be treated as equals with editors and authors, and even have the temerity to be the ones voting on the quality of the work produced by editors and authors galls them. They claim they love fans, but it is clear that they expect those fans to know their place, and that place is subservient to people like Larry.

        Liked by 2 people

      8. And for them, there is a hierarchy among authors as well with the bestsellers and household names at the top, midlist and up and coming authors below them and small press and short fiction authors at the end. That’s the gist behind all of those “But I’m a bestselling author. I’m important” screeds.

        It’s a stupid mindset, though not limited to Larry and other Baen authors. You also find it a lot among self-published authors. It’s also completely contrary to Worldcon’s ethos of “Everybody is a fan first.”

        Liked by 2 people

      9. Gee, if only there was a word for people who were only capable of viewing their communities as a set of hierarchies, with those below deferring to those in authority above…

        Liked by 3 people

      10. That was lightning-fast action from the concom.

        Everyone had said they’d give them a few days to discuss it, and their press release said they’d decide “over the weekend”. That seemed reasonable for an all-volunteer organization of people who have jobs, kids, other lives, and in a pandemic. So everyone hung fire.

        And yet the un-honoring came much quicker than that. Before the weekend.*

        I speculate but have no proof at all that:

        1. she told the concom she was standing firm with the bigotry

        2. vast numbers of staff said they’d quit if she wasn’t de-honored, which would have made running the con impossible.

        3. probably both of the above.

        *Not to be confused with The Weeknd, who also gets put down by WM organizations. I mean, really, dude couldn’t get ONE Grammy nomination for one of the biggest albums of the year, the #1 single of the year, and being the Super Bowl halftime show? He is NOT down with racism and fascism. I’m a suburban older white housewife and even I thought that was a travesty.

        Liked by 1 person

  8. I’ve been on the periphery of Worldcon politics for over thirty years. (I may even have been on a bid committee once, but it was many years ago and I don’t know if we got as far as a formal bid committee.) I am close to someone who was on the executive committee of a winning bid so I know how much work it takes both to run a bid and then run a convention if you happen to win. The fact that Worldcon has been able to somehow function for so many years as a largely volunteer organization is a minor miracle of its own.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Worldcon as an institution is an amazingly organic structure that should praised unto high for having survived as long as it has. If the likes of Larry and his ilk were as well organised, they would indeed be terribly terrifying, but they are both stupidly and comically inept.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. See my comment below about trying to capture the central government of Worldcon being like trying to capture a cloud of smoke with your bare hands.

        Liked by 1 person

  9. As one of the people who maintains the WSFS, Worldcon, NASFiC, and TheHugoAwards web sites, I end up getting e-mail from people who don’t know a whole lot about how Worldcon works. I’m not surprised that they assume that Worldcon is a Big Corporation with a Board of Directors and a Big Boss (the specific terms for those things change, but the implications do not). In the past few days, I had one such person demand that the management of Worldcon (obviously a single entity) order DisCon III to reverse its decision. He seemed nonplussed when I pointed out that every Worldcon is an independent entity, and that nearly everything they do (except for a few things explicitly defined in the WSFS Constitution) is the responsibility of that one committee. He pivoted to saying that Worldcon’s management should do a better job of picking those committees. I asked (and I explicitly said that I wasn’t being sarcastic and I meant it) how he thought Worldcon committees were selected. He never answered. Again, this really isn’t surprising, particularly for people who are authoritarians. (And remember that there are left-wing authoritarians, too, like those who demanded that the Worldcon Board of Directors override the members and strike all of the Puppy finalists on the 2015 Hugo Award ballot.) The squishy nature of Worldcon is perplexing and maddening to many people, to the extent that I think some of them are convinced that we’re lying when we point them at the rules and say, “That’s how it works.” They can’t believe that anyone would run things that way. There are certainly times when I have difficulty believing anyone would run things this way, either.

    Trying to “capture” Worldcon is like trying to “capture” a cloud of smoke with your bare hands. Every time you get some of it, the rest of it slips out of your fingers and pops up somewhere else.

    Liked by 6 people

    1. Liberal evangelical blogger Fred Clark has pointed out that the Left Behind books about the End Times assume the U.N. is already set up as something close to a world government, or could be one if it we don’t stay vigilant.

      Liked by 2 people

    2. And that’s the upside part of WorldCon being a roaming convention hosted by different conventions. It can have a year when the convention is a mess from the com committee, but you can’t hijack the whole thing. And the Hugo Awards are voted on by people who A) like WorldCon in general and B) are attending the particular WorldCon and thus their personal tastes influence who gets nominated and wins that year.

      I think that’s what drives the Puppies most wild. They kept trying to accuse Hugo voters and authors of being an organized cabal (and then one run by publishers,) and trying to game the Hugos with their own organized group. They kept trying to turn it into a conspiracy with their own SFF version of the imaginary Antifa. But they kept dealing with different people and different authors.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Quite, and on top of all that they managed to tick off a whole lot of people who don’t agree on many things at all, but did agree that the pile of finalists forced onto the ballot by people taking advantage of a system that previously assumed good intentions by the participants was Bad.

        Changing WSFS governance is like steering a supertanker, which drives a lot of people batty when they want Strong Action Immediately. However, it means that no individual Worldcon can destroy the entire institution.Even a flat-out bankrupt Worldcon committee (this has happened) can’t destroy Worldcon as an institution because of the legal and financial firewalls between individual committees and WSFS overall. For example, a bankruptcy court probably couldn’t order the sale of the service mark “The Hugo Awards” to a Big Media Company to settle a Worldcon’s debt, because that convention doesn’t own the Hugo Awards; it only licenses them for a single year.

        There is a small amount of organized central governance, but it’s primarily there to make sure that no one individual or group can permanently hijack Worldcon and the Hugo Awards. That legal entity (Worldcon Intellectual Property and its board of directors, the WSFS Mark Protection Committee) doesn’t run Worldcon; it just manages the organization’s ongoing intellectual property rights, because it’s impractical for any individual Worldcon to do so. In effect, it manages the “license” that the members of WSFS give to each Worldcon committee through the site selection process, and as long as each committee doesn’t violate that license (say, by trying to sell the service marks or something equally improbable), it leaves the Worldcons alone.

        (Actually, the MPC usually only bothers Worldcons when there is a threat to the service marks, as it has to usually scratch up enough money to pay for legal actions to do so, and Worldcon committees have money, while the MPC is deliberately under-funded.)

        Liked by 4 people

      2. “They kept trying to turn it into a conspiracy with their own SFF version of the imaginary Antifa…”

        It hadn’t occurred to me before, but that’s an interesting comparison. Doesn’t entirely fit, of course, but the similarities illustrate the limits of authoritarian thought. With Antifa, *Pups are unable to imagine people coming together without a hierarchical power structure giving orders, and some sort of monetary compensation for their time. They can’t imagine fighting fascism because fascism is bad. And they can’t imagine an org like the WSFS, where people put their effort and energy into something purely for the love of SF/F, not in order to gain worldly power or wealth. So they fill those voids with imaginary cabals to avoid collapsing their worldview.

        Liked by 4 people

      3. They can imagine those organizations but they don’t like them because there isn’t a status hierarchy. They did try to use the non-organized part of WorldCon to their advantage — they thought that if they got their voting slate choices into the nominations that most WorldCon members would go ahead and pick their stuff or at least not use No Award because they weren’t in on the supposed conspiracy. And because the Puppies argued that WorldCon members weren’t that interested in the Hugos. And that would let the Puppies game all the WorldCon conventions because they were organized. That WorldCon members got very pissed multiple times at the attempted hijacking of the awards, shared that they were pissed and voted. So the Puppies did, as kastandlee notes, manage to make WorldCon members united in being angry with them, but it simply wasn’t a conspiracy mob.

        But saying it was a conspiracy mob of elitist cheaters saves face among their own more than accepting that a lot of people were angry because they behaved badly, lied a lot and also nominated a lot of stuff no one was excited about.

        Liked by 3 people

    3. You could even make the argument that Worldcon, as currently constituted, is what most organizations would look like under a utopian anarchy or utopian libertarian society, if such a thing were possible. People volunteering their time and other resources to doing something that they love.

      Liked by 5 people

      1. I agree. WSFS has rules, and it requires people participating in its society to abide by those rules, so it doesn’t meet the standard that some nominal libertarians have, which I think can be stated as “I want no rules and no consequences for anything I do!” But within those rules, it tries to give people a lot of freedom of action, but that means words have consequences. It’s that “has consequences” part that a lot of the Freeze Peach people have difficulty parsing.

        By the way, no rules are ever self-enforcing. In WSFS’s case a bunch of volunteers keep the system running, not for any reason other than our love of the field and of our society. I certainly don’t get paid for maintaining the WSFS web sites!

        Liked by 2 people

  10. Another poster I saw and replied to on Twitter insisted he knew all about Worldcon and about how one of its co-chairs had quit, and then proceeded to misgender that person. When I pointed that out to him and give him a way out of it (it could have been a typo, after all), he called me a coward and didn’t address the point.

    Liked by 5 people

  11. The other day I came across a YouTube video which provided a good example of oblivious privilege. Trent Park House in London was used as a luxury POW camp, first for Luftwaffe officers, and then for German generals. Considerable intelligence information was obtained by M.I. 19 by bugging the building and listening in on their conversations.

    Apparently none of the prisoners wondered why they were being treated so well.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trent_Park#Second_World_War

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Not really. He has acquired a battalion of self-appointed “moderators” that report his posts to FB for anything…or nothing. FB eventually gets tired of it and he loses access.

      Regards,
      Dann
      This Tagline is OFF TOPIC! (as if the rest of the message wasn’t)

      Like

      1. I’m confident that he wasn’t reported for anything or nothing. He usually points out what got him banned – true, sometimes it’s an obviously over zealous algorithm but it’s usually for substance. I mean, why would anybody bother reporting him for innocuous stuff when he’s inevitably going to do say something that FB bans people for cause?

        Like

      2. There really is someone whose hobby is following Larry around waiting for him to do something banworthy and then reporting it to FB’s powers-that-be. (It’s not me, nor anyone who frequents either of our blogs.) Of course, Larry always makes a point of repeating behavior that’s gotten him banned before. He likes the victim cred.

        Liked by 2 people

      3. Maybe or FB has learnt to keep an eye on him after past issues. He gets shared a lot and also directs his followers in FB to other arguments elsewhere. If he was trying to get banned it’s hard to see how his behaviour would be much different

        Liked by 2 people

      4. MG : “Of course, Larry always makes a point of repeating behavior that’s gotten him banned before. He likes the victim cred.”

        I’m sure it keeps him warm at night. It doesn’t get much sympathy except from others of the performative outrage ilk.

        Heh – I just got banned for three days for making a comment to a good friend along the lines of “Friend, you ignorant slut, “. Where’s my victim card?

        Liked by 1 person

      5. Heh – I just got banned for three days for making a comment to a good friend along the lines of “Friend, you ignorant slut, “. Where’s my victim card?

        Funny thing is, many of his bans are for precisely that sort of behavior. His circle of friends made up a couple of fictional nations that were at war and then traded insults over it. Since FB doesn’t talk, there isn’t a good way of knowing if their algorithm was boned or if he was reported.

        Regards,
        Dann
        THIS IS A TEST OF THE USELESS TAGLINE SYSTEM. THIS IS ONLY A TEST

        Like

      6. There were times when he suggested it was a poorly written bit of programming. There were other times when it happened so quickly after his return that he considered someone reporting him was a more likely explanation.

        ::shrug::

        Now playing Rocket Man by Sir Elton John.

        Regards,
        Dann
        TAGLINE ERROR! Report to tech support

        Like

  12. I’m guessing Toni might still be able to go to Worldcon if she wanted to. They’d probably even comp her membership and a +1.

    She’s just not GoH any more. I don’t think she’s been banned from the premises, though I might be wrong.

    Naturally, she probably prefers not to attend now, but nobody’s going to frog march her out of the convention center or hotel if she decides to pop in to see friends.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. Which, in fact, she isn’t.

        But Puppies are going to claim that, because lying is what they do.

        She can still go to the con all she wants. Attend every darn panel.

        Or she could just hold court in the bar, which is in the finest tradition of fandom.

        (But I bet she doesn’t.)

        Liked by 2 people

      2. She was un-honored (for very dishonorable behavior), but not un-fanned or un-personed. I’m sure she still has an attending membership in good standing, can vote on the Hugos, go to panels and business meetings.

        I don’t know how close she lives to the con, but if she wants to show up to thrill her fans and annoy her enemies, why not? Meet up with authors and friends.

        Or she could certainly say “bah humbug” and stay home.

        But Puppies will try to spin it as a ban — which it isn’t.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Lurkertype: I’m sure she still has an attending membership in good standing, can vote on the Hugos, go to panels and business meetings. I don’t know how close she lives to the con, but if she wants to show up to thrill her fans and annoy her enemies, why not? Meet up with authors and friends.

        Or she could certainly say “bah humbug” and stay home.

        Given the way she behaved in 2015, I’m quite sure it’s going to be the latter.

        Liked by 1 person

      4. I mean, providing the con goes on in meatspace at all.

        Even if it does, I suspect it’ll have a smaller amount of warm bodies on site that usual, and lots of people who haven’t ginned up a fight with the rest of fandom will be staying home because of virus, lack of money, lack of money caused by virus, etc. I mean, I’ll be lucky to have gotten both of my vaccine shots by then.

        But yeah, I’m sure she’ll take this with the good grace and sportsmanship all the Puppies show, as she has demonstrated before.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.